What It Means to Make the Internet Accessible

Accessibility is not a feature; it is the fulfillment of the web's promise: participation without barriers. When Tim Berners-Lee invented the web, he envisioned universal access—information and services available to anyone, anywhere, regardless of physical capability. The W3C explicitly states that the web is designed to work for all people, whatever their abilities; accessibility is an essential aspect, not an optional enhancement.

Checklists and laws matter, but they are tools—the goal is meeting disabled people's needs in the real world. WCAG provides shared language for minimum expectations. The ADA establishes legal accountability. But a site can pass automated checks and still fail users. A site can avoid lawsuits and still exclude people. The real measure isn't conformance to criteria; it's whether a person with a disability can understand, navigate, and complete tasks independently and with dignity.

The scalable path is making accessibility a default property of how software is built. Organizations that achieve lasting accessibility don't do it through heroic efforts or compliance projects. They build it into the factory: accessible components, pipeline enforcement, continuous monitoring, ongoing remediation. When accessibility is infrastructure, it persists. When accessibility is a project, it decays. WebAIM's 2024 Million report found 95.9% of home pages failing accessibility—evidence that project-based approaches haven't worked at scale.

Key Takeaways

Making the internet accessible is both a technical challenge and a human imperative.

• Accessibility is the web's original intent – Universal access was a design goal from the beginning, not a later addition
• Disabled people's needs are the primary measure – Checklists help; actual usability by actual people is what matters
• Benefits extend beyond disability – Accessibility helps everyone, but the moral core is equal participation for disabled people
• Laws exist because exclusion persists – Legal requirements reflect society's decision that digital exclusion is unacceptable
• Infrastructure is the only scalable path – Audits and projects don't produce lasting accessibility; systems do

The Web's Original Promise

The web was designed for universality from its inception.

Tim Berners-Lee's Vision

The web's inventor explicitly connected it to universal access. The W3C, which he founded, states that the web should work for everyone regardless of ability. This isn't retrofitted positioning—it's foundational design intent.

What "Universal" Actually Means

Universal access encompasses:

+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
|          Dimension          |              What It Means               |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
|     Device independence     |    Works on any device with a browser    |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
|     Network independence    |      Works across connection speeds      |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
|   Geographic independence   |         Accessible from anywhere         |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+
|     Ability independence    |   Usable by people with any disability   |
+-----------------------------+------------------------------------------+

Accessibility isn't "extra." It's one dimension of the universality the web was built to provide.

The Gap Between Intent and Reality

Despite this vision, WebAIM's 2024 Million report shows:

• 95.9% of home pages have detectable WCAG failures
• Average of 56.8 errors per page
• Same basic issues (contrast, alt text, labels) persist year after year

The web's promise remains largely unfulfilled for disabled users.

Defining Accessibility in Human Terms

Accessibility is ultimately about people, not compliance criteria.

What Accessibility Enables

A person with a disability should be able to:

• Understand information – Content is perceivable through their senses
• Navigate – They can find what they need
• Operate controls – Interactive elements work with their input methods
• Complete tasks – End-to-end journeys are achievable
• Do so independently – Without requiring assistance from others
• Do so with dignity – Without special treatment or workarounds

The W3C's Human-Centered Framing

W3C's "Accessibility: It's About People" resource emphasizes that accessibility is about ensuring digital technology is usable by people with disabilities. It explicitly notes that checklists, standards, and laws can distract from the fundamental goal: meeting real needs.

Beyond Technical Correctness

A button can be technically accessible (proper role, keyboard operable, has accessible name) and still fail users:

• The label might be confusing
• The placement might be unexpected
• The timing might be too fast
• The feedback might be unclear

Accessibility requires technical correctness and usability. The technical foundation enables the human experience.

Who Accessibility Serves

Accessibility is essential for some and useful for many.

Essential for People with Disabilities

The CDC reports over 70 million US adults have a disability. Categories include:

+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|     Disability Type     |                Web Access Needs               |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|    Vision (blindness)   |     Screen reader compatibility, alt text     |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|   Vision (low vision)   |          Contrast, zoom, text sizing          |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|         Hearing         |             Captions, transcripts             |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|          Motor          |     Keyboard access, target sizes, timing     |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|        Cognitive        |   Clarity, predictability, error prevention   |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+

For these users, accessibility isn't a convenience—it's the difference between access and exclusion.

Useful for Everyone

Accessibility features help many people:

• Temporary impairments – Broken arm, eye surgery recovery
• Situational constraints – Bright sunlight, noisy environment, one-handed use
• Aging – Declining vision, reduced motor control
• Preference – Keyboard power users, high contrast preference

The Curb Cut Effect

Curb cuts were designed for wheelchair users. They also help parents with strollers, travelers with luggage, delivery workers with carts. Digital accessibility has similar effects: captions help in noisy airports, keyboard navigation helps power users, clear structure helps everyone.

Keeping the Core in Focus

While broad benefits are real, the moral imperative is disability access. Accessibility exists because excluding people with disabilities from digital services is wrong. The broader benefits are bonuses, not justifications.

What Inaccessibility Actually Costs

The cost of inaccessibility extends beyond legal liability.

Costs to Users

When digital services are inaccessible:

• Blocked access – Can't complete purchases, applications, transactions
• Dependence on others – Must ask family or friends for help
• Privacy loss – Must share passwords, personal information
• Time loss – Workarounds take longer; some never succeed
• Dignity loss – Treated as edge case, afterthought
• Opportunity loss – Jobs, education, services unavailable

These are daily realities for millions of people.

Costs to Organizations

Organizations with inaccessible services face:

• Legal risk – Seyfarth Shaw reports 8,800 ADA lawsuits in 2024
• Lost revenue – Disabled users have $13 trillion global spending power per the World Economic Forum
• Lost customers – Users who can't complete purchases go elsewhere
• Reputation damage – Public accessibility failures harm brands
• Procurement loss – Government and enterprise contracts increasingly require accessibility

Costs to Society

Digital exclusion at scale means:

• Reduced economic participation
• Increased dependence on social services
• Unequal access to education and employment
• Democratic participation barriers
• Healthcare access challenges

The internet is infrastructure. Inaccessible infrastructure excludes people from modern life.

Why Laws Exist

Legal requirements reflect societal decisions about acceptable exclusion.

The ADA and Digital Access

The Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination in public accommodations. DOJ guidance makes clear that organizations must ensure their online services are accessible. Digital services are not exempt from non-discrimination requirements.

Legal Requirements Exist Because

• Voluntary compliance hasn't worked (95.9% failure rate)
• Market forces haven't prioritized disabled users
• Exclusion from digital services causes real harm
• Society has decided this exclusion is unacceptable

Laws are tools that reflect values. Accessibility laws reflect the value that disabled people deserve equal participation.

The Gap Laws Address

If accessibility were happening naturally, laws wouldn't be necessary. The persistence of basic failures—missing alt text, unlabeled forms—decades after standards existed shows that voluntary approaches are insufficient.

What an Accessible Internet Looks Like

Imagine the web working for everyone.

In an Accessible Internet

Headings are meaningful and consistent. Users can navigate by heading to find content quickly. Document structure is clear.

Forms are labeled and errors are recoverable. Every input has an associated label. When errors occur, users know what went wrong and how to fix it.

Keyboard navigation is reliable. Tab moves through interactive elements in logical order. Enter activates buttons. Escape closes dialogs. Focus is always visible.

Images have descriptions when needed. Informative images have alt text that conveys their purpose. Decorative images are properly marked.

Documents are accessible. PDFs are tagged and navigable. Or better: information is published as HTML first.

Videos have captions. Deaf and hard-of-hearing users can follow video content.

New features don't re-break old fixes. CI gates prevent regressions. Monitoring catches drift. The system maintains itself.

The Technical Foundation

This accessible internet requires:

+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|          Component           |                     Purpose                      |
+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|   Accessible design system   |        Components built right by default         |
+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|      CI/CD integration       |        Prevents accessibility regressions        |
+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|    Production monitoring     |   Catches drift from content and third parties   |
+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|    Remediation workflows     |           Fixes issues in source code            |
+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
|          AT testing          |             Validates real usability             |
+------------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+

When these systems exist, accessibility persists. Without them, every improvement eventually decays.

Making Accessibility Continuous, Not Heroic

Sustainable accessibility doesn't depend on heroes.

The Problem with Hero Dependence

Organizations often rely on:

• One dedicated accessibility champion
• One annual audit
• One compliance project

When the champion leaves, priorities shift, or the project ends, accessibility degrades.

The Infrastructure Alternative

Instead of hero dependence:

+--------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|              Hero Model              |           Infrastructure Model          |
+--------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|   One person reviews accessibility   |   Everyone uses accessible components   |
+--------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|      Annual audit drives fixes       |      CI catches issues continuously     |
+--------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|      Project remediates backlog      |      Systems prevent backlog growth     |
+--------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|       Compliance owns outcomes       |     Engineering owns implementation     |
+--------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------+

Accessibility as Expectation

In mature organizations:

• Accessibility is in job descriptions
• Accessibility is in definition of done
• Accessibility is in component APIs
• Accessibility is in CI pipelines
• Accessibility is in production monitoring

It's not someone's job. It's how the job is done.

The Commitment

Making the internet accessible requires specific commitments.

At the Organizational Level

• Acknowledge that disabled users are real users
• Set explicit accessibility targets
• Invest in infrastructure (design systems, CI, monitoring)
• Measure outcomes, not just activities
• Maintain accountability

At the Team Level

• Use accessible components
• Run accessibility checks in CI
• Test with keyboard and screen reader
• Fix issues before shipping
• Track regressions as bugs

At the Individual Level

• Learn accessibility fundamentals
• Use semantic HTML
• Test what you build
• Speak up when accessibility is skipped
• Keep learning

The Long-Term View

Accessibility isn't achieved and then done. It's maintained continuously:

• New features need accessibility
• New content needs accessibility
• New technologies need accessibility patterns
• New team members need accessibility knowledge

The commitment is ongoing.

FAQ

Isn't accessibility too expensive for small organizations?

Basic accessibility isn't expensive. Using semantic HTML costs nothing. Using a label element instead of placeholder costs nothing. Maintaining keyboard operability costs nothing. The expensive part is remediating years of accessibility debt—which is an argument for building accessibility in from the start, not skipping it.

Can't AI just solve this?

AI can help with detection and some remediation. It can't evaluate usability, understand context, or replace human testing with assistive technology. AI accelerates accessibility work; it doesn't eliminate the need for human judgment and verification.

What if our users don't include disabled people?

They do. You may not know it because disabled users who can't complete tasks leave without complaining. 70+ million US adults have disabilities. Some percentage of any significant user base includes disabled users—you're just not hearing from the ones your product excludes.

How do we know if we're making progress?

Measure: barrier rate on critical journeys, regressions per release, mean time to remediate, user-reported issues, AT testing outcomes. Progress means these metrics improve over time. A single audit score isn't progress—it's a snapshot.

What about perfect accessibility?

Perfect accessibility isn't achievable because accessibility isn't binary—it's a spectrum, and different users have different needs. The goal is continuous improvement toward excellent usability for the widest range of users possible. "Perfect" is the enemy of good.

Where do we start?

Start with critical journeys: can users complete the most important tasks (checkout, signup, account access) using keyboard only? Using a screen reader? Fix blockers in those journeys. Add CI checks to prevent new issues. Build from there.

Related Resources

Internal Links

• What Is Digital Accessibility? A Technical Definition
• Accessibility as Infrastructure, Not a Feature
• Why Accessibility Is a Software Engineering Problem
• The Difference Between Compliance and Usability in Accessibility
• How Continuous Compliance Works
• What Makes Accessibility Hard to Scale

External Sources

• W3C Introduction to Web Accessibility
• W3C Accessibility: It's About People
• DOJ ADA Web Guidance
• CDC 2024 Disability Statistics
• World Economic Forum on Disability Inclusion
• WebAIM Million 2024 Report

This article was written by TestParty's editorial team with AI assistance. All statistics and claims have been verified against primary sources. Last updated: January 2026.